Viewport speed test scene (post your GPU and results)

[Donald2B]

@GregM

I wouldn't try to Match performance from two different versions of Max. I would try the test again within Max 2015 to see if there are any variations.

Also, the K4200 is the next generation of Quadro cards from the K5000...so that may play a part in the results as well.

[3LP]

For viewport performance I would definitely go for the quadro. I already tried to explain that it was way better but all the gforce fanboy just turned me down. Shortly said, when we updated to the quadro k4200, it was more effective than updating our workstations from a i7 2600k to a dual xeon 2670 v2 with the Titan... We could have stayed with our old cpu and just update the gpu actually... Stan

[GregM]

Tried 2015.

3DS Max Design 2015 x64, Nitrous, 2560x1440.

Quadro K5000
W: 15.6s
S: 17.4s
S+E: 18.1s

Somewhat odd results compared to Max 2014, but the overall viewport speed isn't all that different. Shaded in 2015 was basically a push, wire frame was faster in 2015, shaded was slower in 2015.

Still slow compared to 3LP's results:

max 2014 x64
2560x1440


geforce 970 gtx 4gb
w:11.5s
s:11.5s
s+e:14s

I have to think a Titan X would improve on this...

[MoonDoggie]

Can't seem to download it right now.

[Neilg]

For viewport performance I would definitely go for the quadro. I already tried to explain that it was way better but all the gforce fanboy just turned me down.

the current fastest test results posted in this thread (using max2014) are with a $300 geforce, and they're yours too.

[3LP]

Your right, Zakkorn did better with a k4200 and max 2015 though.
I might just ask the boys at work what their results are as they all switched to k4200 and are still on max 2014.

Cheers

[JezUK]

Ummmm, just built a damn fine machine yesterday, 5690x which gives good render speed tests, but my times on here suck.....

Quadro K4200

W = 28sec
S = 37sec
S&W = 31 sec !!!

Latest drivers, 3DS Max 2016 - there has to be something I'm not setting correctly.

Resolution 2560 x 1440.

[JezUK]

3DS Max 2015 x64, Nitrous, 7680x1440 (Triple Monitor), 2560x1440 (Single Monitor Res)

Quadro K5000
W: 17s
S: 17s
S+W: 19s

Troy, those times look impressive and with a K5000 (a card I used to have until I sold my machine and updated to a K4200).

Is that triple monitor all done with the one K5000 ?

I'm asking because I'd like to go triple monitor but am a bit confused with the tech specs on a K4200 (says max is 3840 x 2160) - so would I need 2 cards to have something like (2560+2560+1920 = 7040) ?

[Vizioen]

Troy, those times look impressive and with a K5000 (a card I used to have until I sold my machine and updated to a K4200).

Is that triple monitor all done with the one K5000 ?

I'm asking because I'd like to go triple monitor but am a bit confused with the tech specs on a K4200 (says max is 3840 x 2160) - so would I need 2 cards to have something like (2560+2560+1920 = 7040) ?

I think that is the maximum resolution per monitor. I have a K4000 and 3 monitor setup on that one card, so shouldn't be much of a problem.

[JezUK]

Ummmm, just built a damn fine machine yesterday, 5690x which gives good render speed tests, but my times on here suck.....

Quadro K4200

W = 28sec
S = 37sec
S&W = 31 sec !!!

Latest drivers, 3DS Max 2016 - there has to be something I'm not setting correctly.

Resolution 2560 x 1440.

Okay - here are my revised settings on a K4200 (made some adjustments in the NVidia Control Panel);

3DS Max 2016

W = 18sec
S = 17sec
S&W = 20Sec

3DS Max 2014

W = 15sec
S = 12sec
S&W = 13Sec

Resolution 2560x1440

[JezUK]

I think that is the maximum resolution per monitor. I have a K4000 and 3 monitor setup on that one card, so shouldn't be much of a problem.

Thanks Vizioen, that has cleared up a lot of confusion - strange to me that this isn't mentioned explicitly in any documentation I have seen.

[Donald2B]

Troy, those times look impressive and with a K5000 (a card I used to have until I sold my machine and updated to a K4200).

Is that triple monitor all done with the one K5000 ?

I'm asking because I'd like to go triple monitor but am a bit confused with the tech specs on a K4200 (says max is 3840 x 2160) - so would I need 2 cards to have something like (2560+2560+1920 = 7040) ?

Just to follow up...Yes, I'm running Three monitors off a single K5000.

What were the settings that you changed inside of the control panel to make such a drastic improvement to your viewport performance. I've never really had to go in there like I do with game cards. Just curious.

[JezUK]

Just to follow up...Yes, I'm running Three monitors off a single K5000.

What were the settings that you changed inside of the control panel to make such a drastic improvement to your viewport performance. I've never really had to go in there like I do with game cards. Just curious.

Hi Donald,

Thanks for that info - I have two K4200's in my machine, so it's great that I can use one just for my 3 monitors and the 2nd purely for RT - I'm finding that works a treat (with my current 2 monitors).

Re your question, I just played with Set PhysX configuration (though when I now go in there I can't remember what I did). But it was definitely that which set my times to be a lot faster

[Vizioen]

Hi Donald,

Thanks for that info - I have two K4200's in my machine, so it's great that I can use one just for my 3 monitors and the 2nd purely for RT - I'm finding that works a treat (with my current 2 monitors).

Re your question, I just played with Set PhysX configuration (though when I now go in there I can't remember what I did). But it was definitely that which set my times to be a lot faster

Why didn't you buy a gtx 980 or 980ti, it's cheaper than a K4200 and has lots of CUDA more

[JezUK]

Why didn't you buy a gtx 980 or 980ti, it's cheaper than a K4200 and has lots of CUDA more

I got mine at a very good price, a lot less than both the cards you mention (condition: "New 'other'", pulled from machines never used, off eBay).